SUBJECTS OF INITIATING THE ISSUE OF SECURING A CLAIM BY SUSPENSION OF AN INDIVIDUAL ACT OR NORMATIVE LEGAL ACT
Abstract
Purpose. The objective of the article is to identify problems related to the regulatory establishment of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts (individual acts or normative legal acts) of subjects of imperious plenary powers and suggest ways to solve them. Methods. A special formal-logical method has been applied in order to study the issue f compliance with the requirements of the principle of legal certainty in the normative consolidation of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers. By means of such general theoretical methods as analysis, synthesis, generalization and modelling, legislative errors in establishing a range of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim have been identified, and suggestions to correct them have been made. Results. The article analyses the provisions of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine in terms of the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers. Based on the analysis of scientific approaches and case law, the issue of whether the administrative court and all the parties of court proceedings (the plaintiff, the defendant, the third parties and the individuals granted by law to appeal to the court in the interests of others) are actual right holders to initiate the issue of securing a claim by suspending the acts of the subjects of imperious plenary powers has been investigated. Conclusions. It has been proven that the legislator, contrary to the principle of legal certainty, does not provide for all the subjects of initiating the issue of securing an administrative claim. It has been noted that there is a collision between the provisions of part 1 and part 2 of art. 150 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine. This collision lies in the fact that part 1 of this article imperatively establishes that the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim are exclusively the parties of court proceedings and the administrative court, whereas part 2 also refers to the subjects of initiating the issue of securing a claim the individual who has not acquired the procedural status of a party of court proceedings (the plaintiff) yet, although may acquire it. It has been substantiated that the legislator, referring the defendant and the third parties who do not declare independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute on the part of the defendant as parties of court proceedings to the subjects of initiating the issue of securing an administrative claim, did not take into account the legal nature of this procedural institution. It has been substantiated that giving the administrative court the right to secure a claim on its own initiative corresponds to the specifics of administrative proceedings. It has been proposed to amend part 1 of art. 150 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine in order to comprehensively consolidate the range of subjects of initiation of the issue of securing a claim, which in turn will improve the procedure for implementing the institution of securing an administrative claim.
References
2. Diorditsa, I. V. (2012). Zabezpechennia pozovu v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi Ukrainy [Securing a claim in the administrative proceedings of Ukraine]. Biuleten’ Ministerstva iustytsii Ukrainy, no. 3, pp. 55–61 [in Ukrainian].
3. Kodeks administratyvnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy [Code of Administrative Proceedings of Ukraine] from July 6, 2005 (2005). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy (VVR). No 35–36. No 37. Art. 446 [in Ukrainian].
4. Konstantyj, O. V. (2015). Zakhyst prav fizychnykh ta iurydychnykh osib v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi: problemy teorii i praktyky [Protection of the rights of individuals and legal entities in administrative proceedings: problems of theory and practice]. (Doctor’s thesis). Kharkiv [in Ukrainian].
5. Kravchuk, O. V. (2021). Schodo sub’iektiv initsiiuvannia zabezpechennia pozovu v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi [Concerning the subjects of initiating securing a claim in administrative proceedings]. Teoriia ta praktyka suchasnoi iurysprudentsii : mater. nauk.-prakt. konf. (May 30, 2021). 2. Pp. 334–336 [in Ukrainian].
6. Kuzmenko, A. I. (2017). Treti osoby v administratyvnomu protsesi [Third persons in administrative procedure]. (PhD Thesis). Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
7. Kuzmych, V. V. (2021). Zabezpechennia administratyvnoho pozovu: osoblyvosti zastosuvannia pryntsypu ofitsijnoho z’iasuvannia vsikh obstavyn u spravi [Securing an administrative claim: peculiarities of the application of the principle of official establishment of all circumstances in a case]. Visnyk L’vivs’koho universytetu. Seriia iurydychna. No. 72. Pp. 73–79 [in Ukrainian].
8. Lubavska, I. R. (2017). Nehatyvni naslidky zlovzhyvannia nedobrosovisnymy uchasnykamy rynku eksportno-importnykh operatsij pravom na zabezpechennia pozovu v administratyvnomu protsesi [Negative consequences of abuse by unscrupulous participants in the market of export-import operations the right to secure a claim in the administrative process]. Sudova apeliatsiia. No. 4. Pp. 23–30 [in Ukrainian].
9. Martsynkevych, S. A. (2021). Pravovi zasady zabezpechennia pozovu v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi [Legal bases of securing a claim in administrative proceedings]. (PhD Thesis). Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
10. Poberezhna, N. P. (2021). Zabezpechennia administratyvnoho pozovu iak sposib zakhystu prav ta interesiv fizychnykh i iurydychnykh osib [Ensuring an administrative lawsuit as a way to protect the rights and interests of individuals and legal entities]. (PhD Thesis). Dnipro [in Ukrainian].
11. Rym, T. O. (2017). Instytut zabezpechennia pozovu: novely zakonodavstva [Institute for Securing a Lawsuit: Novels of Legislation]. Pravo Ukrainy. No. 9. Pp. 137–145 [in Ukrainian].
12. S’omina, V. A. (2007). Zabezpechennia pozovu v administratyvnomu sudochynstvi [Securing a claim in administrative proceedings]. Derzhavne budivnytstvo ta mistseve samovriaduvannia. No. 13. Pp. 105–111 [in Ukrainian].
13. L’vivs’kyj okruzhnyj administratyvnyj sud (2014). Ukhvala L’vivs’koho okruzhnoho administratyvnoho sudu vid 13.03.2014. Sprava No. 813/2205/14. Retrived from: http://reyestr. court.gov.ua/Review/37597196 [in Ukrainian].
14. Okruzhnyj administratyvnyj sud mista Kyieva (2021). Ukhvala Okruzhnoho administratyvnoho sudu mista Kyieva vid 07.12.2021. Sprava No. 640/35685/21. Retrived from: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/101728550 [in Ukrainian].
15. Khersons’kyj okruzhnyj administratyvnyj sud (2020). Ukhvala Khersons’koho okruzhnoho administratyvnoho sudu vid 25.06.2020. Sprava No. ЗП-16/20. Retrived from: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/90027415 [in Ukrainian].
16. Cherkas’kyj okruzhnyj administratyvnyj sud (2021). Ukhvala Cherkas’koho okruzhnoho administratyvnoho sudu vid 27.01.2021. Sprava No. 580/270/21. Retrived from: http://reyestr. court.gov.ua/Review/94456207 [in Ukrainian].
17. Chudnivs’kyj rajonnyj sud Zhytomyrs’koi oblasti (2021). Ukhvala Chudnivs’koho rajonnoho sudu Zhytomyrs’koi oblasti vid 22.07.2021. Sprava No. 294/918/21. Retrived from: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/98477865 [in Ukrainian].
